On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 7:28 AM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:12 AM Дилян Палаузов <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I have not read the thread “Ticket #28 - Failure report mail loops”. >> > > Thanks, and apologies to the group; I should've checked for an open ticket > on this topic first. > > This one recommends rate limiting rather than simpler "don't" type > guidance. I think we can table this until that ticket is open. > > A possible approach is not to send failure reports for messages >> received on the address for accepting aggregate/forensic reports. >> These messages shall just be excluded from all calculations. >> > > That seems plausible, though less bulletproof than simply using the > address already reserved by the email standard for administrative messages. > I thought that we discussed that ticket and decided that the incidence of problems was low enough to warrant a "WONT FIX" determination. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/?gbt=1&index=W3uGPEpT3Yi5lqKntZXyL8jkNjk --Kurt
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
